Quebec highest acquittal rate in Country-- by a lot

[ToxiK]

You might be under the illusion of living a wonderful life, but is it really that wonderful without faith in God? I know you and I have had our heated arguments, but I can't bring myself to hate you personally, because I do see some good in you (your sense of humour for instance, even if it is often at my expense). So no, I do not believe you (or anyone else here) to be the anti-Christ (leave that for Osama bin Laden).

 

I am a believer (I was baptized with water from the River Jordan and I am a church-goer), but I am not as devoutly religious as I let on that I am. I'm not even as much of a hardline conservative as I let on to be on here. But I am still a Christian with a generally positive view of the modern conservative movement (it isn't a crime is it?).

 

What I believe that I am doing is providing a wider range of opinions than what people here are used to(you've probably noticed that its often everyone vs. me in debates). Too often in our society the public is exposed to only one point of view. I strongly believe that a diversity of viewpoints enriches the society as a whole. Sometimes people like your viewpoints, other times people attack you personally for stating them. My character is somewhat "contrarian" in nature. I do occasionally like to test people's limits (like my rant against the metric system), but by and large, I don't see myself as a troublemaker. I do have somewhat of a dry sense of humour which is fairly hard to tell online.

 

Being an effective debater is a useful skill to acquire. Much like a baseball player might practice their swing with weights on their bat as a challenge, it is good practice to debate people using exaggerated versions of your own positions. At the same time the people you debate with are getting more used to extreme positions and will more easily tolerate your real-life more moderate views. Perhaps if I had grown up in a more conservative environment, I'd be going on tangents about the merits of socialism (or I wouldn't be interested in politics and my life would be a lot easier). I figured people interested in real estate development would most likely be a little more easily swayed to my side of the spectrum.

 

But I'm not completely one dimensional either. I do contribute to the projects section as well (I tipped off mtlurb on a number of projects such as the revised plans for the Hilton, the Hotel Mo, and various other projects scattered all over the place) as I do have a passion for architecture.

 

I have debated with you before and agreed and disagreed with you (if we had always agreed, that would have meant that you would have been right all the time... ). Recently, your positons seemed to be more ideological, and I'll even say almost as a caricatural typical conservative. You said you exagerated your positions as an argumentative tool. It is a written forum, it may not be the right place for that tactic. You seemed serious even in your more absurd argumentations (being agaisnt the metric system?!?). I am not trying to judge you or anything. It is just a comment.

[MTLskyline]

Après les coups, les bouteilles qui revolent, le sang qui gicle, voilà que le love-in s'annonce!

 

Sérieusement, les "contrarians" méritent quand même d'être un peu défendus. Et pour voir du racisme dans les propos de Mtkskyline, il faut durcir unilatéralement ses idées, et vouloir le peinturer dans le coin...

 

D'ailleurs j'aime bien le Québec, mais nous sommes quand même un peu tricotés serrés, en matière de débat... Il faut veiller à maintenir le plus largement ouvert l'espace de ce qui peut être dit et pensé.

 

Cela dit, franchement Mtlskyline, vingt ans de prison pour les p'tits poteux ! Admirer Stockwell Day ! Il est temps de pratiquer la left curve, pour être un lanceur plus équilibré...

Merci pour la défense. Je suis d'accord avec vos propos. Je trouve qu'on n'est pas très ouvert au débat ici, particulièrement de l'aile droite. C'est un peu pourquoi j'aime jouer le role de contrarian, et largement pourquoi je suis un conservateur convaincu. Souvent, les jeunes se rebellent contre l'établissement. Au Québec, l'établissement se trouve sur la gauche. Je pense que une ou deux nouvelles idées à débattre n'ont jamais fait de mal à personne.

 

Au sujet du 20 ans de prison. Oui c'est extrême pour un dealer de pot. Mais je le trouve juste pour un trafiquant de drogue sophistiquée (en particulier s'il est lié à la criminalité organisée) qui vent de la cocaïne, le crystal meth, l'héroïne, etc Je pense que 5 ans est raisonnable pour un revendeur de marijuana (non liés à la criminalité organisée).

[JFrosty]

You might be under the illusion of living a wonderful life, but is it really that wonderful without faith in God? I know you and I have had our heated arguments, but I can't bring myself to hate you personally, because I do see some good in you (your sense of humour for instance, even if it is often at my expense). So no, I do not believe you (or anyone else here) to be the anti-Christ (leave that for Osama bin Laden).

 

Oh, I don't hate you either, your positions just leave me speechless sometimes. As in, a big "what the fuck?".

 

I figured people interested in real estate development would most likely be a little more easily swayed to my side of the spectrum.

 

I'm more interested by architecture and the beauty of it in general than real estate.

 

But I'm not completely one dimensional either. I do contribute to the projects section as well (I tipped off mtlurb on a number of projects such as the revised plans for the Hilton, the Hotel Mo, and various other projects scattered all over the place) as I do have a passion for architecture.

 

I know that, and that's why sometimes I wish politics were pretty much banned on here.

[MTLskyline]

I have debated with you before and agreed and disagreed with you (if we had always agreed, that would have meant that you would have been right all the time... ). Recently, your positons seemed to be more ideological, and I'll even say almost as a caricatural typical conservative. You said you exagerated your positions as an argumentative tool. It is a written forum, it may not be the right place for that tactic. You seemed serious even in your more absurd argumentations (being agaisnt the metric system?!?). I am not trying to judge you or anything. It is just a comment.

 

One thing I always like about your posts is that you always maintain a basic level of respect even when you completely disagree with them (that's what originally rubbed me the wrong way with MtlMan's post).

 

I tend to become more ideological at times when I feel my viewpoint (or right to express it) is being attacked from all directions. Harper sucks. Harper is backward., conservatives are responsible for all of the world's ills, etc., etc. I let out a little bit of steam, and at the same time exaggerate some positions to improve my debating ability (which turned out to be quite useful on more than a couple of occasions in real life).

 

I think I understand why you don't think that a written forum is the right place for experimenting with my debating (hard to differentiate between when I'm serious and when I'm just testing the limits). Although that goes without saying that there are often views expressed from the other side of the spectrum that are just as extreme as anything I have said that pretty much went unchecked by everybody except for me (maybe there is a left-wing version of MTLskyline out there?) As for the metric system debate, I do believe that each system has its merits, and I have to admit that I was a little taken aback at the negative response I received for expressing an admittedly exaggerated viewpoint on the issue.

 

Funny thing about this is, that while I like to be Mr. Conservative here (and I am a card-holding member), when I discuss politics with my father (who is probably even more Conservative than me) or my brother (a strong libertarian), I like to throw "liberal" rebuttals at them to practice debating from the other side as well.

[francely57]

I know that, and that's why sometimes I wish politics were pretty much banned on here.

 

Politics + Race + Religion really shouldn't be discussed here, I don't know why everyone agrees on politics and not the other 2.

All 3 almost always lead to a bunch of stupid posts.

[ErickMontreal]

Publié le 05 août 2010 à 07h26 | Mis à jour à 07h27

 

Hallucinations

La Presse Canadienne

André Pratte

La Presse

 

Pour justifier les importantes dépenses qu'entraînera l'imposition de peines plus sévères pour plusieurs types de crimes, le ministre de la Sécurité publique, Stockwell Day, y est allé cette semaine d'un argument inédit. Selon lui, même si le taux de criminalité est en baisse au Canada, l'approche dure du gouvernement est appropriée parce que «le nombre de crimes non signalés est en hausse, les gens ne déclarent tout simplement pas les crimes à la police comme ils le faisaient.»

 

Les journalistes ont voulu savoir d'où M. Day tenait cette information; le bureau du ministre les a renvoyés à une étude réalisée par Statistique Canada en 2004. Or, l'étude en question ne conforte pas la thèse de M. Day. Si le taux de crimes déclarés a légèrement baissé de 1999 à 2004, de 37% à 34%, ce taux est resté à peu près inchangé pour ce qui est des crimes violents. La majorité des personnes qui n'appellent pas la police agissent ainsi parce qu'elles ne jugent pas suffisamment grave l'incident dont elles ont été victimes. On ne parle donc pas ici de crimes qui mériteraient à leur auteur une peine de détention dans une prison fédérale.

 

De toute façon, on voit mal le lien entre le nombre de crimes non signalés et l'imposition de peines plus sévères aux auteurs d'actes qui, eux, ont évidemment été signalés aux forces de l'ordre.

 

Le ministre de la Sécurité publique a aussi souligné que le taux de criminalité au Canada reste «beaucoup plus élevé que ce qu'on voyait dans les années 60». C'est exact mais il s'agit d'une simplification grossière de la réalité. Le taux de criminalité a augmenté au pays, comme dans la plupart des pays développés, des années 60 jusqu'au début des années 90. Il est en baisse constante depuis ce temps pour la plupart des catégories de crimes, notamment les homicides, les tentatives de meurtre, les agressions sexuelles, les vols qualifiés et les introductions par effraction. Il se peut qu'il faille alourdir les peines dans certains cas, mais le gouvernement trompe la population en justifiant sa politique par des statistiques inexistantes ou tronquées.

 

Au cours de la même conférence de presse, M. Day a rejeté tout compromis au sujet des changements annoncés par le gouvernement dans la méthodologie du recensement de 2011. Il a évoqué l'expérience de pays tels le Danemark et la Norvège, qui ont laissé tomber le recensement à la faveur d'un fichier exhaustif tenu sur chaque citoyen. Étrange exemple quand on sait qu'une telle façon de faire est bien plus néfaste pour la protection de la vie privée.

 

Mais dans quel monde vivent donc les conservateurs? Ou bien ils hallucinent. Ou bien ils déforment sciemment une réalité qui a le malheur de ne pas correspondre à leur idéologie.

[Habsfan]

Merci pour l'artcile ErickMontréal. Je crois sincèrement que je vais votre pour les Libéraux (beurk) aux prochaines élections fédérales. Les Conservateurs commencent vraiment à me faire peur. Harper et sa gang de jesus-freaks essaient de transformer notre pays en un USA-North, et je crois qu'ils vont réaliser que les Canadiens ne sont pas intéressé par leurs politiques. Espérons que d'autres Québecois qui normalement ne votent pas ou qui votent pour le BQ iront voter pour les Libéraux aux prochaines élections. Il faut envoyer un message très clair, non aux conservateurs!

[peluche]

Merci pour l'artcile ErickMontréal. Je crois sincèrement que je vais votre pour les Libéraux (beurk) aux prochaines élections fédérales. Les Conservateurs commencent vraiment à me faire peur. Harper et sa gang de jesus-freaks essaient de transformer notre pays en un USA-North, et je crois qu'ils vont réaliser que les Canadiens ne sont pas intéressé par leurs politiques. Espérons que d'autres Québecois qui normalement ne votent pas ou qui votent pour le BQ iront voter pour les Libéraux aux prochaines élections. Il faut envoyer un message très clair, non aux conservateurs!

 

 

Je vais faire la même chose que toi Habsfan..................the radical right must be kicked out of power and that will not happen without Quebec.

[Cyrus]

Je vais faire la même chose que toi Habsfan..................the radical right must be kicked out of power and that will not happen without Quebec.

 

What radical right? What Jesus freaks? What policy has been enacted or even proposed by the Conservative party that is identifiable as such? I mean we have gay marriage and no abortion law at all, doesn't sound very Jesus-freak government...

 

The most radical thing the party has proposed is having senators elected, a policy which is completely unassailable and would finally end the practice of giving "friends" big salaries and cushy seats for life, while making the institution actually useful.

 

Meanwhile the Liberals are just walking around in the desert because the Conservatives stole their centre base, the Liberals can't be too left because Canadians are centrist by nature, and they can't be centre because that is the Conservatives, LOL

Modifié 6 août 2010 par Cyrus

[peluche]

What radical right? What Jesus freaks? What policy has been enacted or even proposed by the Conservative party that is identifiable as such?:

 

The only reason more radical policies have not been implanted yet is because they have a minority government.Their agenda is clear and their ideology clearly exposed, but they lack the majority necessary to proceed.